The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Responses of ecosystem carbon cycle to experimental warming: a meta‐analysis
Abstract
Global warming potentially alters the terrestrial carbon (C) cycle, likely feeding back to further climate warming. However, how the ecosystem C cycle responds and feeds back to warming remains unclear. Here we used a meta‐analysis approach to quantify the response ratios of 18 variables of the ecosystem C cycle to experimental warming and evaluated ecosystem C‐cycle feedback to climate warming. Our results showed that warming stimulated gross ecosystem photosynthesis (GEP) by 15.7%, net primary production (NPP) by 4.4%, and plant C pools from above‐ and belowground parts by 6.8% and 7.0%, respectively. Experimental warming accelerated litter mass loss by 6.8%, soil respiration by 9.0%, and dissolved organic C leaching by 12.1%. In addition, the responses of some of those variables to experimental warming differed among the ecosystem types. Our results demonstrated that the stimulation of plant‐derived C influx basically offset the increase in warming‐induced efflux and resulted in insignificant changes in litter and soil C content, indicating that climate warming may not trigger strong positive C‐climate feedback from terrestrial ecosystems. Moreover, the increase in plant C storage together with the slight but not statistically significant decrease of net ecosystem exchange (NEE) across ecosystems suggests that terrestrial ecosystems might be a weak C sink rather than a C source under global climate warming. Our results are also potentially useful for parameterizing and benchmarking land surface models in terms of C cycle responses to climate warming.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change
Davidson, E. A., & Janssens, I. A. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04514 · Cited by 6,919
Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants
Root, T. L., Price, J. T., Hall, K. R., Schneider, S. H., Rosenzweig, C., & Pounds, J. A. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01333 · Cited by 4,774
The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology
Hedges, L. V., Gurevitch, J., & Curtis, P. S. (1999) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:tmaorr]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 4,704 · cited 5×
“2– 7) (Gurevitch and Hedges 1999, Hedges et al. 1999, Luo et al. 2006).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialTotal carbon and nitrogen in the soils of the world
BATJES, N. H. (1996) · European Journal of Soil Science · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2389.1996.tb01386.x · Cited by 3,213
Climate–Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis: Results from the C4MIP Model Intercomparison
Friedlingstein, P., Cox, P., Betts, R., Bopp, L., von Bloh, W., Brovkin, V., Cadule, P., Doney, S., Eby, M., Fung, I., et al. (2006) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli3800.1 · Cited by 2,902
Temperature-associated increases in the global soil respiration record
Bond-Lamberty, B., & Thomson, A. (2010) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature08930 · Cited by 1,618
Cited by
Managing uncertainty in soil carbon feedbacks to climate change
Bradford, M. A., Wieder, W. R., Bonan, G. B., Fierer, N., Raymond, P. A., & Crowther, T. W. (2016) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate3071 · Cited by 894
The whole-soil carbon flux in response to warming
Hicks Pries, C. E., Castanha, C., Porras, R. C., & Torn, M. S. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aal1319 · Cited by 659
Temperature response of soil respiration largely unaltered with experimental warming
Carey, J. C., Tang, J., Templer, P. H., Kroeger, K. D., Crowther, T. W., Burton, A. J., Dukes, J. S., Emmett, B., Frey, S. D., Heskel, M. A., et al. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1605365113 · Cited by 528
Self-citationKey ecological responses to nitrogen are altered by climate change
Greaver, T. L., Clark, C. M., Compton, J. E., Vallano, D., Talhelm, A. F., Weaver, C. P., Band, L. E., Baron, J. S., Davidson, E. A., Tague, C. L., et al. (2016) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate3088 · Cited by 382
Biological and geophysical feedbacks with fire in the Earth system
Archibald, S., Lehmann, C. E. R., Belcher, C. M., Bond, W. J., Bradstock, R. A., Daniau, A.-L., Dexter, K. G., Forrestel, E. J., Greve, M., He, T., et al. (2018) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aa9ead · Cited by 341
Metadata
- Authors
- Lu, M., Zhou, X., Yang, Q., Li, H., Luo, Y., Fang, C., Chen, J., Yang, X., & Li, B.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-03
- Volume
- 94
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 726-738
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9170
- OpenAlex
- W2115538225
- Cited by
- 522
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 23.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Responses of ecosystem carbon cycle to experimental warming: a meta‐analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/12-0279.1
- The paper
- Lu, M., Zhou, X., Yang, Q., Li, H., Luo, Y., Fang, C., Chen, J., Yang, X., & Li, B. (2013). Responses of ecosystem carbon cycle to experimental warming: a meta‐analysis. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1890/12-0279.1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
